Can someone explain to me why the HMS Hood was considered the

>>31381720
Same reason they love gun control.

They're fucking idiots.

Holy shit, that is the worst colorized black and white photo I've ever seen. It literally looks like a retard just took a can of spray paint to it.

>>31381732
FPBP. Brits are fucking stupid. They threatened war with Finland for not surrendering to the USSR.

>>31381804
They sold all their guns to Germany right before WW2 started.

>>31381720

It wasn't. It was outdated and the Brits new it. Other than a Johnny Horton song, I don't think anyone honestly called it an the pride of the Royal Navy.

>>31381950
Are you kidding me? Everyone called it the Pride of the Royal Navy. Churchill himself did. If you watch any documentaries on it, all three of the survivors all called her that, and historians all remark on how it was one of the most famous warships in the world at the time.

I just have no idea why this was the case.

>>31381720
>was not sufficiently large to even classify as a battleship.
Hood displaced 44,000 tons and was longer than Bismarck.

>>31382020
Sorry, I meant to say it wasn't sufficiently armored to be classed as a battleship. Hood and Bismarck both had the same size armament, I believe. But the Hood severely lacked in armor, and as thus was still classed as a battlecruiser.

File: battlecruiser_HMS_Hood_in_New_Zealand_1924.jpg (957KB, 3189x2390px) Image search: [Google]

957KB, 3189x2390px

>>31382006
>I just have no idea why this was the case.
Because it was the biggest they had at the end of WW1 and for most of the inter-war period, so it was the ship that got sent on all the show-the-flag missions overseas. Brits always sent their battlecruisers on diplomacy duty.

>>31382045
Well that explains why civilians all loved the Hood, but I still don't understand why anyone with half a brain thought she was really all that great of a ship. Her deck armor was so pathetic that a BB gun could take her out if it plunged on her.

File: HMS_Hood_bow_starboard.jpg (593KB, 3000x2055px) Image search: [Google]

593KB, 3000x2055px

>>31382081
If the Germans put their biggest surface combatant to sea, and your only available fast ships are an aging battlecruiser and a not-quite-finished battleship, what are you gonna do; nothing?

File: 1473987001965.gif (2MB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 500x500px

>>31381732
FPBP

>>31381720

Brit's really liked the battlecruiser meme even though everyone else was moving away from it (even the IJN managed to wise up and slap armor on theirs).

>>31381720
Same as the current Russian super missile cruisers, very well armed but outdated and almost sure to be destroyed by modern weaponry, but still used for force projection bc it's fucking huge and a relic of a better time

>>31382081
Plunging fire did not even kill her. The German 15" guns were powerful enough to penetrate her at the range she was closing to. They were actually less threatening at range due to the very flat trajectory. It was a case of incorrect/insufficient information causing a decision that, against any other 14-15" gun armed battleship in the world, would have been correct.

>>31382117
Try protecting the home isles with something more adequate? I mean, the hype around the Bismarck is just insane. It's ONE fucking battleship, ONE. Typical British alarmist shit were they act as if their opponent is fielding invincible weaponry so they have an excuse in case they fuck up, or win, and then can either put themselves on top of the world or act as if they were up against the impossible.
I feel like 90% of all Brits always say the same, "Well we sunk the Bismarck m8, the fucking Bismarck!" as if that was some kind of impossible and insane undertaking.

>>31382256
I feel like this is bait, but whatever.

>Try protecting the home isles with something more adequate?

British had colonies and holdings they had to protect in the Med/North Africa, India, and Asia/Pacific. The difficulty of this is that there are rarely enough ships to go around, and Germany was not considered nearly the opponent Navy-wise as Japan or Italy. Not to mention nearly all their ships save the Rodneys and King George Vs were WWI vintage.

>I mean, the hype around the Bismarck is just insane. It's ONE fucking battleship, ONE. Typical British alarmist shit were they act as if their opponent is fielding invincible weaponry so they have an excuse in case they fuck up, or win, and then can either put themselves on top of the world or act as if they were up against the impossible.

Bismarck is hyped because wehraboos and muh underdog. It had a poor armor scheme considering when it was built, but powerful guns, high speed, and FCS on par with everything else at the time. Her service history consisted of sinking one aging battleship, then getting sunk while trying to get back to port.

>I feel like 90% of all Brits always say the same, "Well we sunk the Bismarck m8, the fucking Bismarck!" as if that was some kind of impossible and insane undertaking.

Consider public view of the Hood and you have your answer. The laymen thought it was the symbol of British power and couldn't be sunk by a single salvo with the near loss of all hands. So the Bismarck became an even stronger symbol of power in the public psyche and her destruction was a powerful mental relief. The issue is that you're mistaking what the general public perceived as being the same as what the admiralty perceived.

>>31382356
I didn't question the Hood? It was a mere suggestion based on logic.
You don't have to explain British's duties and strength of opponents in the naval game on the other end of the world to me.

>Bismarck is hyped because wehraboos and muh underdog.
>implying it wasn't made out to be the ultimate enemy by the government

I can bullshit on your it's only the public argument. Brits love this fear mongering and hyping the enemy up to unknown heights kind of thing, same with Rommel in the war. It's not critique as much as it is an observation.

Anyways, I stand by what I said. Brits act as if their sinking of one, pretty much unprotected, battleship, mainly due to air power, is the greatest achievement.
I'm not American but the US Navy destroyed almost the entire IJN on their own. You're right, I understand the symbol and importance that both the Bismarck and Hood portrayed but I somehow doubt modern day Brits and perhaps other people as well do. They just think of it as some sort of unbeatable monster.

>Can someone explain to me why the HMS Hood was considered the "Pride of the Royal Navy" at the time of her sinking? And for that matter, why was she so feared across the world?


It wasn't. There's no source for that statement at all, I think people just say it to make its sinking by the Bismarck more dramatic sounding.

File: bism_fb[1].jpg (104KB, 1536x904px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 1536x904px

>>31382485

You understand that propaganda is endemic during (and after) a war right? Killing a giant makes for a great story, and great stories give the folks at home waiting in food lines with ration cards something to cheer about. And sinking the Bismark was important. Yes, it was obsolete by the time it was actually used (same applies to all other WW2 bb's) but that doesn't mean you can just ignore it.

>>31382566
No one said you should ignore it, of course you need to deal with it but at the end of the day, it is one battleship. A single one, up against a country, no an island nation, that is well known for its control of the seas.

>>31382485
No brit ever claimed sinking the Bismark was their greatest achievement.

Battle of Britain is more reasonable.

>>31382006
It was a media meme that the retarded public held aloft. It was billed as the biggest, fastest best looking ship when it was launched and it stuck, regardless of passing time.

Actual RN command knew the ship had weaknesses and was in serious need of an update. And there were always serious misgivings about battlecruisers among some of them.

>>31382485
Hardly, your innate anti-Britfag sentiment is impairing your ability to be objective. But on /k/ the view that Britain is the worst thing in the world is accepted so this isn't surprising. That's basically this entire thread and any thread bout Britain on /k/.

There is a touch of truth to what you're saying but you're exaggerating things a lot.

>>31381720
Cause WE RULED DA WAVEZ an' SHIEEETTT

>>31381804
They even declared war on Finland in 1941 during the continuation war and bombarded the finnish port of Petsamo killing 13.

File: r5rE9lY[1].png (167KB, 555x555px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 555x555px

>>31381720
The RN didn't like her and had derogatory nicknames for her.
But the Hood was big and long, and looked pretty in good weather, so it was used for propaganda purposes to impress the plebs.

>>31382256
>Try protecting the home isles with something more adequate?
They WERE. The problem was, those ships couldn't be dispatched to roam the Atlantic searching for a fast battleship precisely because they had to remain near the British Isles.

Bismarck was no threat to the British Isles; she was a threat to the convoy system.

Jesus fuck the amount of anti-bong hate on /k/ now is stupid.

All of you need to fuck off back to /pol/ or whatever the fuck website you came from

>>31381804
>>31384121
Wat? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco-British_plans_for_intervention_in_the_Winter_War

They very nearly joined Finland against Russia but Norway and Sweden cockblocked it. Then idiotic t.mongolians sided with Nazis and then the Western Allies had no choice. Much have been made of Finnish 'bravery' when foolishness was more apt.

>>31384651

You are part of the cancer if you're one of those plebbit-faggots screaming "lmao go back to /pol!111"

What has hating brits to do with being from /pol/? Even half of the people that hate jews here probably never lurked /pol/ in their entire life cause the board is full of newfaggots.

>>31382020
The Bismark wasn't a Battleship either.

>>31384687
Yep, the Bismarck was a variant of the FAMAS.

>>31384651
>/pol/ is the root of all the bad on /k/
You're as bad as people on /pol/ screaming about the Jews

>>31384702
The Bismark was a hybrid of a cruiser and a battleship, now colloquially known as a pocket battleship. This was due to the treaty imposing tonnage limits on Gernany, who wanting a powerful ship, had to compromise. The Bismark had rather abysmal armor, although it's guns were quite powerful by contrast. Due to its lack of heavy armor they found it quite convenient to give it strong engines so it could be super fast, relatively.

>>31384706
Removing /pol/ would improve /k/ by about 200% although I don't know if that's directly applicable to this thread.

>>31384679
UK was anti-soviet prior to barbarossa, after that with the whole allies thing of course they had to become hostile to Finland, western allies would've gladly left Finland to be taken by the soviets after barbarossa so siding with the nazis was the only option.

>>31384717
>The Bismark was a hybrid of a cruiser and a battleship, now colloquially known as a pocket battleship
No, the Bismarck was a straight up battleship.
"Pocket battleship" was a colloquial term given to the Deutschland class cruisers which had 11 inch guns but worse armor protection than regular heavy cruisers.

File: 1469751350319.jpg (45KB, 298x460px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 298x460px

>>31384717
you're talking of the the Deutschland-Class, not the Bismarck-Class of ships...

>>31384725
>>31384731
I am very tired forgive me.

>>31384717
>Bismarck class
>poor armor
>pocket battleship

Stop this nonsense

Élan has no logic.

Élan made the hood the pride of the British Navy, just like Élan sent thousands to charge machine guns in red pants.

European war logic of the early to mid 20th century is sub par at best.

>>31384591
>I could finish that Hood with one blow
>If you get what I mean

>>31381720
What ships did the british navy have that were newer, more heavily armoured and armed?

You should also know that the Hood was not considered a battleship until a long time after she sunk. During her days, she was considered a battlecruiser.

> Be britain.
> looses its pride of the fleet.
> Sends Out HALF THE FUCKING ROYAL NAVY IN A VENDETTA TO KILL BISMARK.

Bismark and hood are both overrated.

Hood was only the pride of the royal navy because it showed the flag across the world, so every crewman wanted to be posted on her. Meaning her crew was top notch.

Bismark is overrated because she got a one in a million hit.


>>31385222
Nelson class had some pretty wicked armour. It was sloped internally and was designed funny so what it would always be facing its enemies at a 30-50degree angle to angle its armour even more.

I remember reading a post where dome nutjob belived that the British wanted the Hood sunk, as it would give them "causi belli" or whatever the fuck to bomb German cities, a bit like "Pearl Harbor was a false flag"-idea. Not really sure what mental hoops he had to jump through to get there, but at least it was fun with some new conspiritard-stuff

>>31386698
Do it again bomber harry...

>>31385222
4, ships that were newer and more heavily armed and armored, the rodneys and the 2 KGV class that had so far been commissioned.
they also had the 5 QEs that while slower had the same armament and better armor and the R class although those vessels were essentially obsolete as they hadnt recieved nearly as much modernisation as the QEs or rodneys.

>>31386481
>> Sends Out HALF THE FUCKING ROYAL NAVY IN A VENDETTA TO KILL BISMARK.

it wasnt half the navy, it was one carrier, 2 battleships a couple of cruisers and half a dozen destroyers.

and sinking bismarck was important because removing bismarck meant one less major surface raider to worry about on convoys so lessened the need to tie down major warships and helped free them up for other duties.

File: 0510cc00.jpg (777KB, 2560x1440px) Image search: [Google]

777KB, 2560x1440px

>>31387746
AESTHETIC

>>31381720
America still liked the Iowas enough to bring them back even though they were useless, Kirov is old as shit but still a big point of Russian pride since it's not like they can be proud of the Kuznetsov. It's a pretty common phenomenon.

>>31384679
Yeah, should've sided with the allies, worked so fine for Poland after the war.

>>31386698
>causi belli
You dumb fuck if you don't know any Latin stop using it and trying to be pretentious.

>>31381720

>The Hood on the other hand was beginning to show her age

What? I was under the impression the Bismarck sank the Hood within like a month of it being launched. That it was brand spanking new when it sunk.

>>31389758
Why is it so hard for you to use Google?

>>31381720
Is it that hard to wrap your head around? 'Pride of' doesn't necessarily mean it's thr most powerful/fastest/largest. HMS Victory could be the pride of the Royal Navy they wanted, use your fucking brain.

>>31382081
>why anyone with half a brain thought she was really all that great of a ship.
Sorry, who is this 'anyone' you speak of?

Firstly, simple national pride
Secondly, I doubt the world feared one battleship, a few German admirals probably made plans about it, but nothing huge

She was a big ship in a big navy, forget about how useful it actually was, it was a relic of Gunboat diplomacy

I'd imagine it was as prestigious as Carriers are today, it's a symbol of power projection

>>31384928
You realise Americans came over to France and figured nobody had one the Great War yet because everyone was cowering in trenches and not attacking enough? Didn't take long to learn that lesson.
That kind of military stupidity is unfortunately a trait shared by every nation.

File: Akari jap eyes.png (339KB, 823x720px) Image search: [Google]

339KB, 823x720px

>>31389875
>everyone was cowering in trenches and not attacking enough?

>>31389875
did you study history from a prize book you got in cereal box?

>>31389791

Because I don't really give a shit about some stupid British boat. What I do care about is why there is such a large discrepancy between what I thought and reality.

I could have sworn that was the case. Sure, my knowledge of it stems from one of those "Sink the Bismarck" specials on History Channel several years ago, but even still that's a big difference.

That special painted a reality of a ship being constructed and launched in the middle of the Bismarck related action, and the first time it was in a battle with it, it was sunk. That's why it was such a tragedy, because a ship built expressly to sink the Bismarck was destroyed so quickly by it.

Could have been another ship. I don't remember.

>>31390036
holly shit

you are really special one ..

>>31390036
>admiral, the bismarck was seen leaving the harbor with the prinz eugen
>my god, we must build a ship big enough to kill it and built it before it reaches the denmark straits

>>31390036
>What I do care about is why there is such a large discrepancy between what I thought and reality.

Because you never bothered to look into it. You assumed your knowledge on the subject gained via "osmosis" or whathaveyou was enough.

>>31390036
Wow

>>31390036
>I'm angry over a figment of my imagination

>>31390036
dude....

>>31390036
I think people may be being a little harsh with you, although its 4chan so what do you expect.

you seem to be confusing the Prince of Wales, a newly launched King George V fast battleship that was sailing with the Hood and fought in the same battle for the Hood

the PoW was very newly launched, so new in fact that she hadnt finished her shaking down cruise and still had civilian technicians from the builders yard on board, she eventually had to break off the action due to mechanical breakdowns in the forward turret, the KGV class were not designed specifically to beat the bismarck, but were contemporaries of the bismarck and while lighter and less heavily gunned were better armored, and more modern in their basic design having HA/LA guns rather than secondary and tertiary batteries, better radar and both better quality armor and a superior armor layout.

HMS Hood was laid down in 1916, commisioned in 1920 and was 21 years old when sunk, and was considered by the admiraliity to be in rather desperate need of a major refit and overhaul

File: last pic of hood from prince of wales.jpg (30KB, 561x573px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 561x573px

>>31390263
It also didn't have most of the armor installed. It was supposed to be some kind of Ultimate Floating Weapon, but since the war was over they decided to delete the armor and designate it as a Bigger Than Usual Battlecruiser.

Shame about that.

File: hms-invincible-sinking-photo.jpg (48KB, 743x406px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 743x406px

Fucking battlecruisers man.

>>31387746
While the Rodney had more firepower, the Hood would've been more heavily armoured (not in terms of actual effective armor but of weight) since it was 50m longer than the Nelson class and weighed 10 000 tonnes more while still being quite a bit faster. The Nelson class also didn't have its thick armour all around it like the QE, but i guess we're in a straw man argument. I do agree that the Nelson-class probably was, all things considered a better designed ship, but what the fuck do i know.

The main reason why the Hood was considered the flag ship of HMN was probably due to her looks and size more than anything (while still being a very intimidating warship).

File: you.gif (415KB, 480x238px) Image search: [Google]

415KB, 480x238px

>>31389875

>>31390395
>The main reason why the Hood was considered the flag ship of HMN
There is no such thing as the flag ship of a navy. A flag ship is the command center of a fleet.
The flag ship of the Home Fleet, of which the Hood was a part, was the Nelson.

>>31390287
they didnt delete the armor, she had additional armor added while being built, the problem was the basic scheme was bollocks, the idea had been to have 3 decks armored, the first detonating the shell the other two absorbing the blast, effective delay fuses meant that that scheme simply meant the shell had to pass through 3 weak layers of armor rather than one probably effective one.

she also was a pretty wet ship due to the added weight.

the hood was designed to be the ultimate battlecruiser, but jutland lead to the idea of the ultimate battlecruiser being significantly slower and more armored than originally conceived.

>>31390395
hood had a greater weight of armor, rodney had a greater thickness and as it used the 'all or nothing' principle a better layout

and yes the size and impressiveness of the ship was why it was used on so many tours and was considered to be a symbol of the british empire

>>31390439
Ah, okay.

Have any of you dreadnaught geeks ever run a scenario where Hood had her original armor scheme when she tangled with the Bismarck? Would it have made the slightest difference?

>>31390418
Yeah, i didn't mean flagship as in the proper tactical and strategic designation, more of the symbolic value of the ship.

Im tired, sue me.

>>31390483
>>31390483
>>31390483
her original scheme? cant imagine that that would be a benefit, the shell that killed her would still have penetrated, still blown her to pieces.

i suppose the knowledge that the ship was so lightly armored and vulnerable and slight speed advantage she would have possessed might have led admiral holland to try and close the range more quickly with Hood and use PoW for longer range plunging fire, closing the range quickly enough might have let Hood land a hit or two and those 15 inch guns were old but still effective guns.

best case the tactics change significantly and Hood gets in a hit or two before sinking, either causing major damage to prinz eugene or some damage to Bismarck before being sunk, most likely case is Hood still gets blown up before landing a effective blow

>>31381720
Propaganda

>>31382256
She was a very much the most dangerous out there for convoy raiding. The big drama was they had to catch her before she could get out into the north Atlantic and munch up convoys. She had high speed, could kill escorts that could not get away. Could potentially one shot merchant ships and could use the u boat service to get targets. The British admiralty were afraid of something like the Admiral Graf Spee actions only much more successful. The AGS was only 16,000 tons the Bismark was 50,000 tons and even faster and better armed. If it had gotten out they would of had to strip a lot of needed ships to hunt it down. The AGS was killable by cruisers. The Bismark would taken major fleet units to kill. And in the process made the convoys more vulnerable to Uboats